Last post by Wally Walters -
There appears to be a bug in foobar2000's embedding of cue sheets with large track lists. If the cue sheet contains more than 100 tracks, the ARTIST field will be imported incorrectly into the FLAC file for all but the last 100. For the rest, foobar2000 copies the ARTIST info from those last 100 tracks.
For example, if a FLAC file contains 140 tracks, #41 through #140 will be correct, but the ARTIST info in track #1-40 will be the ARTIST info from track #101-140. And even when you try to edit track #1-40 manually using the "properties" feature, the ARTIST field still reverts to the ARTIST info from 100 tracks "later."
Last post by Zarggg -
The best answer is to do listening tests for yourself to determine your personal level of transparency.
That being said, I use Apple AAC at Q64 (~128kb/s nominal) and could probably go lower given that my hearing has deteriorated since I started maintaining a digital audio library. That also seems to be the "consensus" transparency level in most cases.
Apart from that, don't do any lossy-to-lossy conversions. If you already have AAC/MP3/Ogg Vorbis/etc, just leave them as they are.
Last post by Wally Walters -
Thanks, I've been using v1.4 since it was released, and I wasn't aware of that. But that being the case, it seems foobar2000's handling of large track lists is buggy, as it doesn't save the correct "Artist" info when embedding the CUE sheet -- only that of the last 100 tracks. For example, if my FLAC file has 125 tracks, #26 through #125 will be correct, but track #1-25 will feature the artist info from track #101-125. And editing those tracks' properties manually doesn't work either -- the "Artist" field still reverts to that of the Track Number plus 100.
I as a mastering engineer will master on neutral gear and test on non-neutral gear after I'm done. Noise usually is one of the more lesser concerns for me (unless it's very loud). I usually look for a balanced frequency response (respective to music genre), dynamics a smaller speaker can handle and good mono compatibility.
Do you master for vinyl? If so, are there additional considerations?
I can't hear any significant glitch with this sample. The click is blends in with the nasty noise. Strangely, upsampling with SoX makes the click slightly bigger compared to a direct encode, letting opusenc.exe do the upsampling. I can hear it in the 48k sourced encode, as a short hiss impulse on the right side, but it still seems acceptable for a lossy encode, and not noticable without focusing on the position. No bass content in this sample either.
Perhaps the player isn't fully gapless?
Still pretty noticeable to me on your opus files. In fact, I noticed this problem when listening to this album in the bus, and not focusing at all on the transition itself. The sound is supposed to be continuous between tracks, but this "click" really annoyed me.
As for the gapless capability of the player, I use Audacious on Linux for testing the samples (no idea if it is perfectly gapless) and Rockbox on my DAP (I know it is perfectly gapless). Anyhow, I should have mentioned that I don't hear the glitch when playing the flac files, but only when playing the opus encoded files : it is not due to the player.
It may depend on how the encoding and/or decoding is done. What happens if you manually convert your files to 48 kHz before encoding? What may be happening here is that if the original is 44.1 kHz and gets resampled for encoding, but gets "stitched back" at 48 kHz, then there may be a fractional sample extra/missing.
Resampling to 48kHz before encoding doesn't change anything. In fact, it seems that the glitch is even more important by doing that, like j7n said (just a subjective feeling, though )